Page 881 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 30 March 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
comes home from work and finds that his car is not there, nor is his teenage son or daughter. He rings the police and reports that the car has been stolen. In fact, teenage son or daughter borrowed the car keys, without consent from mum and dad, and shot off somewhere. They get home later on in the evening and the person rings police operations saying, "Sorry about that; the report we made of a car theft was not a car theft at all, it was just son or daughter borrowing the car".
Claims about levels of incidents show nothing; what is important is levels of offences, and Mr Humphries again knows that, because a document he circulated to me yesterday, trying to make a point about break, enter and steal, shows the number of offences. The number of offences has declined in relation to motor vehicle theft in the ACT, on the six-month reporting period, which is a reporting period I had been aware of when I gave the answer to the Assembly on Wednesday. It was the reporting period in an executive brief I had seen and it showed a marked 12 per cent decrease. More recent police figures continue to show the decrease, although it is running, as at the moment, at about 8 per cent below the previous financial year. The simple fact of the matter is that motor vehicle theft is running below the rate of the previous year, no ifs and buts.
MR HUMPHRIES: I ask a supplementary question, Madam Speaker. I ask the Minister the question again on this basis: Will the Minister concede that for the first six months of the 1991-92 financial year the rate of car theft was significantly higher than it was for the rest of that financial year, so that the first six months of 1991-92 showed a higher rate of car theft? Will the Minister then concede that comparing part of that year with part of this year is an inaccurate reflection of what is taking place and that a better reflection is to look at the full year figure, the monthly rate of car theft throughout the year, and compare it with the monthly rate of car theft for this financial year so far? What is the conclusion from that comparison?
MR CONNOLLY: Madam Speaker, a statistician will tell you that you can usually twist and turn sets of figures to make whatever point you want to make. Politicians are adept at doing that. But no matter how Mr Humphries seeks to twist and turn these figures he cannot make the point he tries to make, that is, that there is an increase in motor vehicle theft. Comparing equivalent six-month periods gives you a basis of comparison.
Mr Humphries: Can you answer my question?
MR CONNOLLY: The answer is that, comparing equivalent six-month periods, there was a 12 per cent decrease. Comparing periods to date, 1991-92 to 1992-93, there continues to be a decrease. No matter how you twist and turn those figures, you cannot get away from the fact that the rate of motor vehicle theft as at 5 March 1993, because that is the latest data that was available on the criminal database, on the brief that Mr Humphries has, is running at 1,042 for the current year; for the previous year it was running at 1,151, or 100 below. If you compare year to date or if you compare equivalent six-month periods, you see a decline in both cases.
Mr Humphries: But not monthly averages?
MR CONNOLLY: You would see a decline on a monthly average as well.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .